影像科学与光化学 ›› 2020, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (1): 144-149.DOI: 10.7517/issn.1674-0475.190818

• 综述与论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

超微血管成像和超声造影对乳腺癌病灶内微血流及超微血管的评价及其联合诊断价值

丁敏侠1, 严婷2   

  1. 1. 西安交通大学医学院附属三二〇一医院 超声医学科, 陕西 汉中 723000;
    2. 西安交通大学附属红会医院 超声科, 陕西 西安 710054
  • 收稿日期:2019-08-20 出版日期:2020-01-15 发布日期:2020-01-15

The Diagnostic Value of Superb Microvascular Imaging and Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound in Microblood Flow and Ultramicro-blood Vessels in Breast Cancer

DING Minxia1, YAN Ting2   

  1. 1. Department of Ultrasound Medicine, 3201 Hospital Affiliated to Medical College of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Hanzhong 723000, Shaanxi, P. R. China;
    2. Department of Ultrasound, Honghui Hospital Affiliated to Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710054, Shaanxi, P. R. China
  • Received:2019-08-20 Online:2020-01-15 Published:2020-01-15

摘要: 本文探讨了超微血管成像(SMI)和超声造影(CEUS)对乳腺癌病灶内微血流及超微血管的评价,及其联合检查对乳腺癌的诊断价值。选取2017年6月~2019年3月我院收治的经手术病理证实的乳腺癌患者106例(106个肿块)作为研究对象,所有患者术前均完成彩色多普勒血流显像(CDFI)、CEUS及SMI检查。比较SMI、CEUS对乳腺癌的诊断准确率及对病灶内血流信号、穿支血管的显示情况。结果显示,106例乳腺癌(106个肿块)中,SMI和CEUS对乳腺癌的诊断准确率分别为79.25%、83.96%,两者比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);SMI联合CEUS检查对乳腺癌的诊断准确率为96.23%,明显高于单一SMI或CEUS的诊断准确率(P<0.05)。在血流信号显示上,SMI检出不丰富血流信号、丰富血流信号分别为64个、42个;CEUS表现为低增强64个、等增强及高增强为42个;SMI和CEUS评价乳腺癌病灶内微血管及血流供应情况具有较好的一致性(P<0.05)。在穿支血管显示上,SMI检出44个、CDFI检出34个,SMI能够清晰检出CDFI不能检出的穿支血管10个。表明SMI和CEUS诊断乳腺癌病灶内微血管及血流供应情况具有较好的一致性,对乳腺癌均有较高的诊断价值,二者联合检查有助于提高乳腺癌的诊断准确率。

关键词: 乳腺癌, 超微血管成像, 超声造影, 血流信号, 穿支血管

Abstract: This paper is to investigate the diagnostic value of superb microvascular imaging (SMI) and contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in microblood flow and ultramicro-blood vessels in breast cancer. 106 cases (106 masses) of breast cancer confirmed by surgery and pathology in our hospital from June 2017 to March 2019 were selected as the study subjects.All patients underwent color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI), CEUS and SMI before operation. The diagnostic accuracy of SMI and CEUS in breast cancer and the display of blood flow signals and perforating vessels in the lesions were compared. The results show that among 106 cases of breast cancer (106 masses), the diagnostic accuracy of SMI and CEUS for breast cancer was 79.25% and 83.96%, respectively, with no significant difference (P>0.05). The diagnostic accuracy of SMI combined with CEUS in breast cancer was 96.23%, which was significantly higher than that of single SMI or CEUS (P<0.05). On the display of blood flow signals, 64 blood flow signals were not rich and 42 blood flow signals were rich detected by SMI. CEUS showed low enhancement in 64 cases, equal enhancement and high enhancement in 42 cases respectively. SMI and CEUS had good consistency in evaluating microvascular and blood flow in breast cancer lesions (P<0.05). On the display of perforating vessels, 44 cases were detected by SMI and 34 cases by CDFI. SMI could clearly detect 10 perforating vessels which could not be detected by CDFI. Research shows:SMI and CEUS have good consistency in the diagnosis of microvascular and blood supply in breast cancer lesions, and have high diagnostic value for breast cancer. The combined examination of SMI and CEUS is helpful to improve the diagnostic accuracy of breast cancer.

Key words: breast cancer, superb microvascular imaging, contrast enhanced ultrasound, blood flow signal, perforator vessel